Heidegger

Standard(s) of Evidence Concerning the Physical Universe

Anthony Crifasi wrote:

>Joseph Polanik wrote:

>>Anthony Crifasi wrote:

>>>Joseph Polanik wrote:

>>>>what I don’t understand is how cracking open Hume’s skull to see his
>>>>brain provides evidence for your belief that Hume actually had a
>>>>brain (as opposed to the mere illusion of having a brain); but, does
>>>>not provide evidence for my belief that Hume actually had a brain
>>>>(as opposed to the mere illusion of having a brain).

>>>because you were talking about something other than a type 2 brain. I
>>>mean nothing but a type 2 brain.

>>it sounds to me like your universe consists of 1 experiencing subject
>>(you) and any number of experienced phenomena — some of which
>>phenomena are claiming to be experiencing subjects also;

>not my universe, but yours … that is, if you continue to make the
>distinctions that you have been making between types 1,2,3.

well, then we are back to the double standard of evidence. we both agree
that we have phenomenological evidence only; we crack open Hume’s skull;
we both observe the brain; and, you claim that *you* can conclude that
Hume has a brain; but, you claim I can not conclude that Hume has a
brain.

how does that follow from the fact that I have defined ‘existence’,
‘reality’ and ‘being’ the way that I have defined these words?

while you’re at it, would you name describe the reality types (or modes
of existence or modes of being) that you recognize?

Joe

–
Philosophy is, after all, done ultimately in the first person for the
first person. — H-N Castaneda

@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
 http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@

Posted on Saturday, December 1st, 2007 at 10:30 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback